Professional Documents
Culture Documents
1, Mei 2018
Abstract
Conducting a research is a compulsory skill to be accomplished by any teacher students of English
language teaching (ELT) department in teacher’s college. As a minimum requirement, each
teacher-student must have experience to conduct a sophisticated Classroom Action Research
(CAR). Within this skill, a teacher-student is expected to grasp various challenges that may occur
in learning, therefore to take necessary actions in order to improve the quality of learning. Hence,
this paper is composed due to an assumption occurred in a preliminary study that students in
English language teaching department have demonstrated numbers of methodologically failures in
conducting CARs. This assumption stimulates a question to answer further, “What sorts of
methodologically failures are demonstrated by teacher’s college students in conducting CARs?”
Researchers as the main instrument in this study develop theoretical criteria form based on
prominent works of Susanto (2010), Hult and Lennung (1980), McKernan (1991), Kemmis and
McTaggart (1992), Winter’s (1996), andMcNiff (2002) to frame the analysis. Data is taken from
selected works stored in a library of a teacher’s college in Nusa Tenggara Barat, by employing two
criteria to students’ works (mini-thesis), i.e. year of publication is 2015 and marked with ‘A’ from
internal examination board of the college. These criteria constrain only two scripts to be further
analyzed. By applying content analysis, this study reveals various kinds of methodological failure
in students’ works about CAR, i.e. (1) violation to collaborative principle of CAR, (2) violation to
the four characteristics of CAR (situational, participatory, evaluative, and cooperative), (3) the use
of learners’ achievement as benchmark of success, (4) developed in quantitative study, (5) failure
in positioning the researcher as a teacher or collaborator, and (6) failure in the construction of
lesson plans.
Key words: Classroom Action Research (CAR), Methodological Failures, Content Analysis
Abstrak
Melaksanakan sebuah riset adalah sebuah keterampilan wajib dimiliki oleh seorang mahasiswa
calon guru di Program Studi Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris di lembaga pencetak tenaga kependidikan
(LPTK). Sebagai persyaratan minimum, setiap mahasiswa harus memiliki pengalaman untuk
menjalankan penelitian tindakan kelas (PTK) yang baik. Dengan keterampilan ini, seorang calon
guru diharapkan mampu mengelola berbagai tantangan yang mungkin muncul dalam pembelajaran
sehingga mampu mengambil tindakan yang diperlukan guna meningkatkan kualitas pembelajaran.
Selanjutnya, artikel ini ditulis berdasarkan asumsi yang muncul dalam studi pendahuluan yang
mengungkap bahwa ditemukan mahasiswa yang menunjukkan kesalahan metodologis dalam
melaksanakan penelitian tindakan kelas. Asumsi ini menjadi pemicu sebuah pertanyaan untuk
dikaji, yaitu “Kesalahan metodologis apa saja yang ditunjukkan dalam penelitian tindakan kelas
yang dijalankan mahasiswa LPTK?” Peneliti sebagai instrumen utama dalam penelitian ini
mengembangkan perangkat kerja berupa kriteria teoretis yang didasarkan pada hasil kajian
penting, seperti Susanto (2010), Hult dan Lennung (1980), McKernan (1991), Kemmis dan
McTaggart (1992), Winter’s (1996), dan McNiff (2002). Sumber data adalah manuskrip penelitian
terpilih dari sebuah LPTK di Nusa Tenggara Barat yang dipilih berdasarkan dua kriteria, yaitu
dipublikasikan dalam tahun 2015 dan telah mendapatkan nilai A dari dewan penguji internal.
Berdasarkan kriteria tersebut, dua manuskrip (skripsi) terpilih menjadi sumber data. Dengan
menerapkan analisis isi (content analysis), penelitian ini mengungkap enam kesalahan metodologis
dalam menjalankan sebuah penelitian tindakan kelas, yaitu: (1) pelanggaran prinsip kolaboratif
7
Journal of Languages and Language Teaching, Vol. 6 No.1, Mei 2018
dalam PTK, (2) pelanggaran empat karakteristik dalam PTK (situasional, partisipatori, evaluatif,
dan kooperatif), (3) penggunaan capaian mahasiswa sebagai standar kesuksesan PTK, (4)
dikembangkan dengan desain penelitian kuantitatif, (5) kesalahan menempatkan posisi mahasiswa
peneliti sebagai guru atau kolaborator, dan (6) kesalahan dalam menyusun rencana pelaksanaan
pembelajaran.
Key Words: Penelitian Tindakan Kelas (PTK), Kesalahan Metodologis, Analisis Isi
instructional technique, and instructional and McTaggart (1992), and Winter’s (1996).
media. Susanto’s account emphasizes this Cohen et.al. (2007:475) provide a simple
research approach constrains its interests to definition of CA as an effort to summarize
the design and implementation of a lesson. and report written data covering main
In Indonesian context, research skill is contents of data and their message. This
implicitly mentioned as one of compulsory analytic tool enables scholars to break in the
skills to be developed by a teacher. entire parts of manuscripts. Two selected
Regulation umber 16 in 2009 issued by the works of teacher students are taken as
State Minister for the Empowerment of State sources of data. The selection of data sources
Apparatus requires teachers to have are following two researcher-driven criteria,
scientific publications to pursue for a higher i.e. year of publication should be 2015 and
position in their carrier. Teachers are the works has got ‘A’ mark from the internal
expected to publish at least some CAR ad-hoc examination board. Based on internal
reports within their professional experiences. data in the teacher’s college, two
In this sense, every teacher is encouraged to manuscripts are then used in further analysis.
develop research skill. Minimum Both works are then investigated through
requirement of education background (in this CA by employing theoretical frame as stated
case a degree in education) also implies that earlier. In analyzing data, this study follows
every future teacher should be well equipped the three-step approach postulated by Miles
with this skill. Therefore, teacher’s college and Huberman (1994), i.e. data reduction,
should be able to develop their teacher data display, and drawing conclusion. About
students’ skill in research. Based on this fact, the use of CA, it helps the researchers in
this study is designed to be an evaluative making inferences by systematically and
work to give further input for teacher’s objectively identifying specified
college management board in order to characteristics within a text (Stone, 1966:5).
improve the quality of their outcomes. Through this analysis, one can explore his or
A preliminary study towards some her critical analysis on specific content of
students’ works labeled as CAR leads to an discourse, in this case a research report. The
assumption that teacher students in college analysis must be performed relative to and
demonstrate methodological failures in justified in terms of the context of the data
conducting CARs. This assumption is also (Krippendorf, 1980:23).
aligned with the fact that many teachers
FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION
dispute their incapability to conduct
sophisticated CARs. Therefore, this study is Findings
intended to conduct a diagnostic work to In data analysis, this study applied an
determine the parameter of failures instrument to analyze two manuscripts that
demonstrated by teacher students. The only were selected based on categories mentioned
research question in this study is, “What in earlier section. All data collected in this
sorts of methodologically failures are process were displayed in table 1 and 2, as
demonstrated by teacher’s college students follows.
in conducting CARs?” Student 1: CAR1
METHODOLOGY Types of Failures
This study employs content analysis (CA) Lo
using a frame that consider critical notation N cat
O io Remarks
of CAR by Susanto (2010), Hult and n
Lennung (1980), McKernan (1991), Kemmis P L
9
Journal of Languages and Language Teaching, Vol. 6 No.1, Mei 2018
10
Journal of Languages and Language Teaching, Vol. 6 No.1, Mei 2018
11
Journal of Languages and Language Teaching, Vol. 6 No.1, Mei 2018
12
Journal of Languages and Language Teaching, Vol. 6 No.1, Mei 2018
the learning materials, as well as his best in Modified lesson plan and problem solving
identifying and recognizing the pupils. submission
Susanto (2010) emphasizes that a CAR
Review of related literature
should be departed from the existing lesson
Relevancy of literature plan, which was modified or revised in order
Different to other research report, in to improve the quality of learning. Both
terms of the state of the arts or theoretical manuscripts indicate opposite direction to
frame of a CAR is not necessarily too this principle.Hult and Lennung (1980) and
comprehensive, as suggested by Susanto McKernan (1991:32-3) assert that a CAR
(2010). He argues that teacher limited access should take feedback from earlier cycle as
to the recent theory of foreign language consideration in improving learning, which
teaching loosen the teacher researcher from is also suggested by Kemmis and McTaggart
the obligation to compile a sophisticated (1992).
review of literature. However, in the case of Manuscript A fails to demonstrate the
involving an expert as the outsider in the process of revising the original lesson plan
research, a CAR is better to be equipped used by the teacher in his instruction before
with the complete ones. conducting the CAR. The writer seems to
Ongoing theoretical response to the given bring a new lesson plan detached to the
problem existing one, which marked as cycle 1. The
Failures in formulating the proper same thing also emerges when he moves to
research problems and working hypotheses cycle 2 after justifying that cycle 1 has failed
in their works also cause improper temporal to solve the problem.The same indication
response in their chapter two, i.e. review of also appears in manuscript B. First, the
related literature. In manuscript A, the writer writer does not depart from the original
proposes chart pocket and vocabulary lesson plan used by the teacher before the
mastery as the two core theoretical responses research. Hence, the writer comes with a
to the given problems in chapter one. There totally different lesson plan offering brand
is no literature discussing about learning new media of teaching. He conducts the
motivation or ‘bored’ students. Meanwhile, research in two cycles too, but the second
manuscript B which defines various cycle is only repeating the same actions in
learners’ problems simplified as speaking cycle 1, with no revision at all.Kemmis and
skill and offering English movies as the McTaggart (1992) propose a small-to-large
solution, discusses too broad theoretical protocol of change due to classroom
framing in chapter two, covering language as situation as constrained in the existing lesson
communication device, language elements plan. This may avoid any researcher to bring
and skills, speaking as language skill, and in the out-of-context ideas into classroom.
learning media to facilitate foreign language Both manuscripts fail to obey this principle
acquisition. No review is provided regarding by adopting brand new teaching media.
learners’ problems as stated in the Standard of success
introduction. These facts are driven by the Many experts have suggested the
writer’s misidentification of sources of boundary of a CAR defined within the
problems. In other words, regarding the aim process of learning in terms of quality by
of chapter two, both writers fail to give departing from the existing lesson plan. The
adequate state of the arts of their works. success of a CAR should also begin from
Research Method this notation rather than just seeing students’
learning achievement simply through an
13
Journal of Languages and Language Teaching, Vol. 6 No.1, Mei 2018
14
Journal of Languages and Language Teaching, Vol. 6 No.1, Mei 2018
their proposal, but not implementing the on the given explanation, there are some
truly CARs in their studies. failures found in the two manuscripts caused
by misunderstanding the CAR principles, i.e.
Procedure of entering the site
One of important steps in conducting a procedure of problem identification,
CAR is strategy of entering the site. This selecting participants and distributing tasks,
step helps any researcher to reduce potential using pre-test and post-test, focus on
bias caused by the presence of outsider, in learning achievement rather than learning
this case the writer. Thus, Susanto (2010) process, bring in new things into the
suggests any researcher to have at least one classroom, no clear path of lesson plan
or two preliminary visits before starting data development, improper design and use of
collection. The frequency can be less or data collection instruments, and there is no
more based on observer’s judgment. He can well prepared pre-action activity. Various
begin to collect data once he convinces that typical failures may result unqualified
the classroom interaction has run naturally manuscripts, which can also misled the
student teachers in applying CAR in their
and ready for data collection procedure.
Both manuscripts do not give clear steps of future carrier. However, teacher students are
entering the sites. So, the validity and not solely responsible for the failures, since
reliability of data used in the two both of them have been supervised by some
manuscripts are questionable considering no faculty members. This indicates that the
justification that classrooms are naturally failures can also be reduced through an
entered by the two writers. intervention to the faculty members.
15
Journal of Languages and Language Teaching, Vol. 6 No.1, Mei 2018
Kemmis, S. and McTaggart, R. 1992.The Stone, P.J. et al. (1966). The General
Action Research Planner (third edition). Inquirer: A Computer Approach to
Geelong, Vic.:Deakin University Press. Content Analysis. Cambridge, MA: MIT
Krippendorff, Klaus. 1980. Content Press.
Analysis; An Introduction to its Susanto.2010.KonsepPenelitianTindakanKel
Methodology. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage, asdanPenerapannya.Surabaya:LembagaP
188 pp. enerbitan FBS UNESA.
McKernan, J. 1991.Curriculum Action Winter, R. 1996.Some principles and
Research. London: Kogan Page. procedures for the conduct of action
McNiff, J., with Whitehead, J. (2002) Action research.In O. ZuberSkerritt (ed.) New
Research: Principles and Practice Directions in Action Research.London:
(second edition). London: Routledge Falmer.
Falmer.
Acknowledgements
Miles, Mattew B. and A. Michael The authors deliver their grateful to
Huberman. 1994. Qualitative Data
Dean of Faculty of Language and Art
Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook. Education of X Teacher College for giving
Second Edition. California: Sage her permission to conduct this study,
Publication, Inc. librarian of faculty’s library for her
Reason, P., & Bradbury, H. (Eds.). 2001. assistance during data collection, and head
Handbook of action research: of faculty’s administration office for his
Participative inquiry and practice. valuable data assisting the authors in
London: Sage Publications. selecting right manuscripts to be investigated
in this study.
16